| Literature DB >> 32195274 |
Barbara Hinney1, Vojislav Cvjetković2, David Espigares2, Jonas Vanhara2, Christoph Waehner2, Bärbel Ruttkowski1, Radinka Selista1, Daniel Sperling2, Anja Joachim1.
Abstract
After introduction of the anticoccidial toltrazuril for the metaphylactic treatment of suckling piglet coccidiosis, only few field evaluations on the effect of treatment against the causative agent, Cystoisospora suis, were performed. In 2018, a field study was conducted to detect the presence of the parasite on pig farms in four different European countries, and to evaluate management parameters possibly associated with infection and disease. A total of 49 farms from Austria, the Czech Republic, Germany and Spain were included. Repeated pooled fecal samples from 603 litters were taken in the 2nd and 3rd week of life. Samples were examined by autofluorescence for the presence of C. suis, and fecal consistency was scored. For each farm a questionnaire was provided to document management and treatment history. Feces scored as diarrhoeic were not significantly more often positive for C. suis than non-diarrhoeic feces but samples from litters with previously reported occurrence of diarrhea were significantly more often positive (p = 0.000). Pasty feces were significantly more often positive than those of other consistency (p = 0.005). Overall, 71.4% of the farms and 50.1% of the litters were positive for C. suis at least once. The prevalence on the farms reached up to 100%. Diarrhea was seen in samples from 53.1% of the farms (9.6% of the litters). Cystoisospora suis was diagnosed on 80.8% of the farms with vs. 60.8% of those without diarrhea. Toltrazuril was applied on 30 farms, and of these 53.3% had diarrhoeic samples and 66.7% were positive for C. suis vs. 19 farms that did not use toltrazuril with 52.6% diarrhoeic and 79.0% C. suis positive samples (p > 0.05). Only on two farms a disinfectant with activity against coccidia was used, and C. suis was not detected there. Current control of C. suis appears to be insufficient on the majority of the examined farms. These findings highlight the importance of correct application of medication, and an effective hygiene management. To maintain effective parasite control, efficacy monitoring of the control measures should be implemented.Entities:
Keywords: Isospora suis; coccidiosis; diarrhea; disinfection; piglets; swine; toltrazuril
Year: 2020 PMID: 32195274 PMCID: PMC7064465 DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2020.00113
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Vet Sci ISSN: 2297-1769
Topics addressed in the farm questionnaire and analyzed with regard to infections with Cystoisospora suis and diarrhea (dependent variables).
| • Number of sows [49, 41] | n.a. | 0.328* | n.a. | 0.773* |
| • Solely nursery farms? (yes/no) [49, 41] | 14/17 | 0.646 | 9/17 | 0.938 |
| • Number of other pigs [47, 39] | n.a. | 0.472* | n.a. | 0.863* |
| • Closed system (yes/no) [44, 36] | 13/18 | 0.074 | 9/18 | 0.738 |
| • All in all out? (yes/no) [48, 40] | 30/3 | 0.738 | 18/34 | 0.533 |
| • Diarrhea (yes/no) on farm level [43, 41] | 21/22 | 0.124 | n.a. | n.a. |
| • Diarrhea (yes/no) on litter level (percentage of litters with diarrhea on farms) [24,22] | n.a. | 0.051* | n.a. | n.a. |
| • Use of toltrazuril (yes/no)? [46, 41] | 20/24 | 0.662 | 14/24 | 0.476 |
| • Age of piglets at toltrazuril application [26, 22] | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. |
| • Day of iron application? [48, 40] | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. |
| • Use of antibiotics (yes/no), if yes which compound? [46, 38] | 16/20 | 0,453 | 9/20 | 0.321 |
| • Cleaning and disinfection of stables? (yes/no) [47, 41] | 34/40 | 0.675 | 21/40 | 0.347 |
| • Which disinfectant is used? [37, 31] | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. |
In square brackets: number of questionnaires (out of 49) that supplied information on this point, followed by the number of farms that could be included into statistical analysis. P-values were calculated with Pearson's χ2 test or the Mann–Whitney-U test (marked with an asterisk*).
Bold value indicate the significant when farms with insufficient sample size were excluded.
Number of farms and litters positive for C. suis and diarrhea.
| Min-max number of sows/farm | 65–200 | 250–2,600 | 95–6,500 | 240–10,000 | 65–10,000 Mean: 1249.7 Median: 600 |
| N positive farms [%; 95% confidence interval] | 5 [71.4;35.89–91.78] | 12 [70.6;46.87–86.72] | 3 [42.9; 15.82–74.95] | 15 [83.3; 60.78–94.16] | 35 [71.4; 57.59–82.15] |
| N farms >50 % positive litters [%] | 0 [0.0] | 3 [17.6] | 1 [14.3] | 12 [66.7] | 16 [32.7] |
| N litters | 78 | 161 | 71 | 293 | 603 |
| N positive litters [%; 95% confidence interval] | 9 [11.5; 6.19–20.50] | 53 [32.9; 26.13–40.50] | 11 [15.5; 8.88–25.65] | 229 [78.2; 73.08–82.51] | 302 [50.1; 46.10–54.06] |
| N farms with diarrhea [%] | 4 [57.0] | 8 [47.1] | 4 [57.1] | 10 [55.6] | 26 [53.1] |
| N litters with diarrhea [%] | 11 [14.1] | 12 [7.5] | 7 [9.9] | 28 [9.6] | 58 [9.6] |
Figure 1Number of nursery farms vs. farms with nursery and fattening, grouped according to number of sows.
Figure 2Fecal score in relation to excretion intensity with Cystoisospora suis.
Figure 3Cystoisospora suis-positive and negative litters (by autofluorescence) per individual farm.